High Court
‘India’s Daughter’ ban extended till 15 April, HC seeks MIB advisory
NEW DELHI: The ban on the telecast of the controversial BBC documentary India’s Daughter by Leslee Udwin about the 16 December, 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape will continue till 15 April, though the film continues to be available on the Internet.
The Delhi High Court today (18 March) asked the central government to place before the court the advisory issued by it on 3 March prohibiting exhibition of the documentary.
A division bench of Chief Justice G. Rohini and Justice R.S. Endlaw posted for 15 April the two public interest litigations (PILs) before it for revocation of the ban on the documentary’s telecast.
A different bench had yesterday declined to immediately revoke the ban on the telecast of the documentary. It said it has “no problem” about airing the documentary but the case (appeals of the convicts against death sentence) was pending before the Supreme Court.
It also observed that media trials tend to influence judges by subconsciously creating pressure.
The documentary is about the gang rape of a 23-year-old trainee physiotherapist, who was brutally assaulted in a moving bus in Delhi. The film kicked up a storm after one of the convicts Mukesh Singh justified the action.
The documentary also has comments from the convicts’ counsel A.P. Singh and M.L. Sharma, who allegedly made derogatory remarks against women and who have alreadybeen issued notices by the Bar Council of India.
The PILs said that the ban on the documentary was in clear violation of fundamental rights under Article 19 of the constitution.
They sought direction to declare as illegal the act of banning the documentary by the Home and Information and Broadcasting Ministries, and the Delhi Police commissioner.
The Centre on 3 March issued an advisory to ban the broadcast of the documentary and the trial court had banned it on 4 March until further orders.
The pleas also sought direction for the Supreme Court registry to constitute a three-judge special bench to hear the appeals of the four death row convicts, pending since 25 August, 2014.
The Supreme Court, in July, put on hold the execution of the four convicts in the case. Going by the chatter on social media, the public at large wanted to see the documentary, as within a day of it being put up on YouTube, it was viewed by more 2.86 lakh people, the pleas said.
High Court
Bombay HC likely to protect Kartik Aaryan’s personality rights
Actor seeks Rs 15 crore damages over AI misuse, deepfakes and merch
MUMBAI: In an age where faces can be faked and voices cloned, even stardom needs legal armour. The Bombay High Court has indicated it will pass an order safeguarding the personality and publicity rights of Bollywood actor Kartik Aaryan, following allegations of widespread digital misuse of his identity.
The matter, heard by Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh, centres on a plea filed by Aaryan seeking a broad John Doe injunction against 16 defendants, including e-commerce platforms, social media intermediaries and unidentified entities. The court noted the concerns raised and said appropriate orders would be issued.
At the heart of the case lies the growing threat of artificial intelligence-driven impersonation. Aaryan’s petition flags multiple instances of deepfake content circulating across platforms such as YouTube and Instagram, where his likeness has allegedly been used to create fabricated videos, including false romantic link-ups and objectionable scenarios designed to drive engagement.
In one particularly alarming example, the actor’s legal filing cites AI-generated visuals that falsely associate him with controversial global figures, including Jeffrey Epstein. The plea argues that such content not only misleads audiences but also causes serious reputational damage.
The concerns extend beyond content to commerce. The suit alleges that unauthorised merchandise bearing Aaryan’s name and image is being sold across platforms such as Amazon, Flipkart and Redbubble, without his consent. Additionally, the actor has raised red flags over AI-powered chatbots that mimic his voice and simulate conversations, warning of potential misuse in fraudulent activities.
Aaryan’s filing underscores that he is the registered proprietor of the trademark “Kartik Aaryan”, with his name, voice and likeness carrying significant commercial value. The unauthorised use of these attributes, the plea states, leads to “immediate and irreparable harm” to his goodwill.
Seeking both preventive and punitive relief, the actor has requested a permanent injunction restraining entities from exploiting his identity in any form be it name, voice, signature or distinctive dialogue style. He has also sought damages amounting to Rs 15 crore for alleged commercial misappropriation and reputational loss.
The case highlights a larger legal and cultural moment, where the lines between reality and replication are increasingly blurred. As AI tools become more accessible, courts are now being called upon to define the boundaries of identity in the digital age, where a face may be famous, but control over it is no longer guaranteed.
